From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@kernel.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Chuck Lever <cel@kernel.org>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>,
Olga Kornievskaia <okorniev@redhat.com>,
Dai Ngo <Dai.Ngo@oracle.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Subject: [PATCH v9 3/6] mm: add folio_mark_dropbehind() to mark a folio dropbehind and account it
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2026 18:11:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261024221152.6965-4-snitzer@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261024221152.6965-1-snitzer@kernel.org>
A folio allocated by an RWF_DONTCACHE write is marked dropbehind before
it is dirtied, so folio_account_dirtied() adds it to WB_DONTCACHE_DIRTY
and folio_clear_dirty_for_io() or folio_account_cleaned() subtracts it
when it is cleaned. Nothing marks a folio that already exists. A
caller that sets PG_dropbehind on a folio that is already dirty
unbalances the counter: the clean subtracts what was never added, and
once the counter goes negative, wb_stat_sum() reads it as zero and the
DONTCACHE writeback kick stops writing anything back for every writer
on that bdi_writeback.
Add folio_mark_dropbehind(), the inverse of the clear in
__filemap_get_folio_mpol(): with the folio locked, mark it and, if it
has been counted as dirty, add it to WB_DONTCACHE_DIRTY. Neither
PG_dirty nor the dirty tag alone says that the folio is counted.
filemap_dirty_folio() sets PG_dirty before folio_account_dirtied()
counts the folio, under the i_pages lock and without the folio lock. A
folio marked between the two would be counted twice.
__folio_cancel_dirty() uncounts a folio and clears PG_dirty, but leaves
the tag until writeback or truncation clears it. A folio marked with
that stale tag would be counted and never uncounted.
folio_account_dirtied() sets the tag in the same i_pages section that
counts the folio, and every path that uncounts a dirty folio holds the
folio lock. So set the flag and test both under the i_pages lock, and
count the folio only when both are set. A dirtier not yet counting the
folio finds the flag set and counts it itself. Under that lock the wb
is inode_to_wb(),
as in folio_account_dirtied(). A concurrent lookup without
FGP_DONTCACHE that clears the flag again subtracts what this added.
The name follows folio_set_dirty() and folio_mark_dirty(): the first
only sets PG_dirty, the second also accounts the dirty folio.
folio_set_dropbehind() likewise only sets PG_dropbehind, and
folio_mark_dropbehind() also accounts it in WB_DONTCACHE_DIRTY.
A later commit uses it in NFSD to drop a page shared by two misaligned
WRITEs once both have written it.
Signed-off-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@kernel.org>
---
Notes:
Notes on the v8 review questions, with the code that answers each:
- Counting rule. The same rule as filemap_clear_dropbehind() in
1/6: folio_mark_dropbehind() counts the folio only when
folio_test_dirty() and PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY are both true. The
test is under the folio lock (VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO checks it) and
the i_pages lock. A stale tag on a clean folio does not add a
count.
- Double count. A folio that has PG_dropbehind returns at the first
test, before it changes the count.
- No writeback. A mapping without writeback gets only the flag.
folio_account_dirtied() does not count such a folio either
(mapping_can_writeback()).
include/linux/pagemap.h | 1 +
mm/filemap.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/pagemap.h b/include/linux/pagemap.h
index 0adfa6605653d..3012bd95812a1 100644
--- a/include/linux/pagemap.h
+++ b/include/linux/pagemap.h
@@ -1310,6 +1310,7 @@ void end_page_writeback(struct page *page);
void folio_end_writeback(struct folio *folio);
void folio_end_writeback_no_dropbehind(struct folio *folio);
void folio_end_dropbehind(struct folio *folio);
+void folio_mark_dropbehind(struct folio *folio);
void folio_wait_stable(struct folio *folio);
void __folio_mark_dirty(struct folio *folio, struct address_space *, int warn);
void folio_account_cleaned(struct folio *folio, struct bdi_writeback *wb);
diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
index 5176c4125a4db..d0e4d1788fd40 100644
--- a/mm/filemap.c
+++ b/mm/filemap.c
@@ -1644,6 +1644,48 @@ void folio_end_dropbehind(struct folio *folio)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(folio_end_dropbehind);
+/**
+ * folio_mark_dropbehind - mark an existing folio dropbehind
+ * @folio: the folio, locked by the caller
+ *
+ * Mark @folio so that the writeback that cleans it drops it. A folio
+ * already counted as dirty is added to WB_DONTCACHE_DIRTY, as
+ * folio_account_dirtied() would have added it had it been marked when
+ * dirtied, so that the clean that subtracts it leaves the counter balanced.
+ *
+ * folio_account_dirtied() counts a folio under the i_pages lock, in the
+ * section that sets its dirty tag, after PG_dirty has been set without the
+ * folio lock. Every path that uncounts a dirty folio holds the folio lock.
+ * So with the folio locked and the i_pages lock held, the folio is counted
+ * when both PG_dirty and the dirty tag are set. PG_dirty alone is not
+ * enough: a dirtier past folio_test_set_dirty() but not yet counting finds
+ * the flag set and adds the folio itself. The tag alone is not enough
+ * either: __folio_cancel_dirty() uncounts a folio and clears PG_dirty, but
+ * leaves the tag until writeback or truncation clears it.
+ */
+void folio_mark_dropbehind(struct folio *folio)
+{
+ struct address_space *mapping = folio->mapping;
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(!folio_test_locked(folio), folio);
+
+ if (folio_test_dropbehind(folio))
+ return;
+ if (!mapping || !mapping_can_writeback(mapping)) {
+ folio_set_dropbehind(folio);
+ return;
+ }
+ xa_lock_irqsave(&mapping->i_pages, flags);
+ folio_set_dropbehind(folio);
+ if (folio_test_dirty(folio) &&
+ xa_get_mark(&mapping->i_pages, folio->index, PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY))
+ wb_stat_mod(inode_to_wb(mapping->host), WB_DONTCACHE_DIRTY,
+ folio_nr_pages(folio));
+ xa_unlock_irqrestore(&mapping->i_pages, flags);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(folio_mark_dropbehind);
+
/**
* folio_end_writeback_no_dropbehind - End writeback against a folio.
* @folio: The folio.
--
2.52.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-24 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-24 22:11 [PATCH v9 0/6] mm, iomap, NFSD: stop uncached writes reading back shared pages Mike Snitzer
2026-10-24 22:11 ` [PATCH v9 1/6] mm: take a folio off WB_DONTCACHE_DIRTY only if it was counted there Mike Snitzer
2026-10-24 22:11 ` [PATCH v9 2/6] mm: expose WB_DONTCACHE_DIRTY in bdi debugfs stats Mike Snitzer
2026-10-24 22:11 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2026-10-24 22:11 ` [PATCH v9 4/6] mm, iomap: keep a partly covered page until an uncached write completes it Mike Snitzer
2026-10-24 22:11 ` [PATCH v9 5/6] mm, iomap: let an uncached writer complete its shared pages itself Mike Snitzer
2026-10-24 22:11 ` [PATCH v9 6/6] NFSD: drop a shared boundary page only once both WRITEs have written it Mike Snitzer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261024221152.6965-4-snitzer@kernel.org \
--to=snitzer@kernel.org \
--cc=Dai.Ngo@oracle.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=cel@kernel.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neil@brown.name \
--cc=okorniev@redhat.com \
--cc=tom@talpey.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox